Uncovering the Storytelling Power of Communication: Applying Walter Fisher's Narrative Theory to Three Presidential Crisis Speeches
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
University of Nebraska at Omaha DigitalCommons@UNO Student Work 12-1-2003 Uncovering the storytelling power of communication: Applying Walter Fisher's narrative theory to three presidential crisis speeches Sharon Dowell University of Nebraska at Omaha Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork Recommended Citation Dowell, Sharon, "Uncovering the storytelling power of communication: Applying Walter Fisher's narrative theory to three presidential crisis speeches" (2003). Student Work. 444. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/studentwork/444 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Student Work by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. UNCOVERING THE STORYTELLING POWER OF COMMUNICATION: APPLYING WALTER FISHER’S NARRATIVE THEORY TO THREE PRESIDENTIAL CRISIS SPEECHES A Thesis Presented to the Department of Communication and the Faculty of the Graduate College University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts University of Nebraska at Omaha by Sharon Dowell December 2003 UMI Number: EP73082 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI EP73082 Published by ProQuest LLC (2015). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 THESIS ACCEPTANCE Acceptance for the faculty of the Graduate College, University of Nebraska, in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree University of Nebraska at Omaha. Committee I t± L L ~ Chairperson, ----- —-v.-ik**-- .-= UNCOVERING THE STORYTELLING POWER OF COMMUNICATION: APPLYING WALTER FISHER’S NARRATIVE THEORY TO THREE PRESIDENTIAL CRISIS SPEECHES Sharon H. Dowell University of Nebraska, 2003 Advisor: Dr. Deborah Smith-Howell This study applies Walter Fisher’s narrative theory of communication to a rhetorical analysis of three presidential crisis speeches: President George W. Bush’s speech on September 20, 2001 after the terrorist attacks, President Franklin Roosevelt’s Pearl Harbor speech on December 8, 1941 and President Bill Clinton’s Oklahoma City bombing speech on April 23, 1995. The speeches were analyzed to discover the accuracy of the theory, why the speeches were successful and if they supported the case for a presidential crisis communication genre. Three main conclusions resulted from this rhetorical analysis. First, the theory was verified as accurate because it defined the speeches as successful, which they were. Second, the theory enabled rich description of the speeches’ success, revealing the internal mechanisms and power of exceptional stories. Third, employing the theory provided confirmation for defining an important genre being debated among communication scholars, presidential crisis communication. This study illuminates several important elements for the communication field: storytelling power, presidential influence and genre. First and foremost this thesis points to the power of stories in creating shared meaning, in defining history, and in setting future policy. By tapping into inherently human communication needs and expectations, stories can become profoundly powerful in characterizing our understanding of history as it occurred and how it is about to occur. The power of the president in creating meaning during national crises cannot be overstated. Given the power of these types of presidential crisis orations in setting policy and creating definitions for posterity, they must be given due academic and critical attention, in part by attaining classification as a unique genre. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I thank my advisor Dr. Deborah Smith-Howell for her guidance and skill as a rhetorical scholar, I could not have reached this achievement without her, I also owe a debt of gratitude to Dr. Jeremy Lipschultz and Dr. Joan Latchaw, committee members, for their thoughtful insight and encouragement. This group of professionals urged me to dig deeper and think harder, resulting in a thoroughly rewarding and enjoyable experience. I thank my husband for enduring this adventure with me, for listening when I approached meltdown and for never losing faith in me. A wholehearted thanks goes to my furry children, Recce and Henry, for keeping me company at all hours and for helping me keep perspective. There is very little in the world more important or more sustaining than a good long stretch, a scratch behind the ear and a tasty snack. Finally, I would be amiss without thanking Mo Borden, Liz Stienblock and Jim Weigel for their encouragement. TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER ONE: REVIEW OF LITERATURE Introduction 1 Review of Literature 4 Narrative Theory 4 Application o f Fisher* s Narrative Theory 7 Presidential Rhetoric 12 Presidential Crisis Rhetoric 16 The Speeches 21 Research Questions 33 CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY 34 CHAPTER THREE: POWERFUL STORIES The Potency of Powerful Stories 37 One: Accuracy of the Storytelling Theory 38 Two: Rich Description 39 Three: Presidential Crisis Genre 57 CHAPTER FOUR: CONCLUSION AND DISCUSSION Summary 68 Discussion 69 Strengths and Limitations 71 Future Research 74 Bibliography 78 1 CHAPTER 1 Introduction On the crushing, surreal and tragic day of September 11,2001, terrorists indiscriminately plucked the lives of thousands of innocent people in New York City, Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania. As a shocked and grieving nation searched to understand the horror and death (Begley, 2001), President George W. Bush gave what critics have called the speech, one for the history books. Media declared his oratory on September 20 to Congress as eloquent, inspired and reassuring (Apple, 2001; Broder 2001; Brownstein, 2001; Kurtz, Sept. 21,2001; Saltzman, 2001; Shales, 2001; Thomas, 2001). Polls taken after the speech showed almost unanimous public support for the president and his call to eradicate terrorists (Broder, 2001; Matthews, 2001; Post-ABC Poll, 2001; Shales, 2001). President Bush’s job as leader of the United States after the September 11 tragedy was heralded, where his very right to be president had been previously questioned after a bitter presidential election with questionable results (Brownstein, 2001; Fineman, 2001, Succeeding when it matters; Matthews, 2001), in which he won the presidency by the slimmest electoral margin since 1876 (Duffy, 2002). People magazine declared the president one of the 25 most intriguing people of the year 2001, saying that despite being the first president since 1888 to lose the popular election, and despite his “oddball speech patterns” (p. 51), President George W. Bush had risen to the occasion after the September 11 attacks and was now regarded in a different light than he was during his first months as president (Everybody’s president: George W. Bush, 2001). 2 Why did critics and, according to polls, the U.S. people rally behind the president following one pivotal speech? “Well, we can’t make fun of Bush anymore; he’s smart now,” quipped Jay Leno during his monologue on the Tonight Show on September 24,2001. As I listened to Bush’s speech on September 20,1 was spellbound by the president’s words. As he spoke about the innocent victims and heroes and what the nation must do next, he weaved a powerful tale. He told the story of September 11 and galvanized viewers with a call to action for the United States. The country was going to fight terrorism across the globe. The story’s ending was a call to war, a war against terrorism. He both eulogized the dead and pushed the nation into war. The power of Bush’s speech resulted from the power of his story, or narrative, as he addressed a crisis situation. Two landmark speeches given by two other U.S. presidents occurred in similar situations, wielding powerful stories with similar results. President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s speech after the attack on Pearl Harbor and President Bill Clinton’s speech after the Oklahoma City bombing are the two speeches perhaps most similar to Bush’s. All three speeches occurred after tragedies in the U.S., massive death and widespread fear and sorrow. Americans looked to their head of state for answers and for direction, for consolation and reassurance, these three presidents delivered through their speeches. Not only were the three speeches remarkable, but they are alike enough in structure and message to fall into the same category, or speech genre. Communication scholars have debated the existence of a speech category into which these speeches would fit, a potential genre called presidential crisis communication. I support this call for a new genre with the findings of my study. 3 When I embarked on this study, President Bush’s speech was called a defining moment in his presidency. The same is true of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s Pearl Harbor speech and President Bill Clinton’s speech at a memorial ceremony after the Oklahoma City federal building bombing. The speeches were, by all counts, brilliant and successful. They addressed the crises at hand and set a course of action while embodying the patriotic American ideals. They were eloquently written and spoken. They had a clear, logical progression from beginning to end. All of these characteristics equate to a well-told story. It is through the power of their stories that I explain the success of the speeches. Human beings are storytellers. Movies, books, newscasts or a presidential address - these forms of communication relay a “story,” a narrative. The study of stories, of narration, is a useful means of studying human communication. Theorists propose that stories are what weave the fabric of society (Mumby, 1993; Real, 1996).